Five men suing Obama administration after falling into ‘suspicious activity’ file

From photographing public works of art to bulk-buying computers, five Americans now have a record on file with US intelligence agencies for carrying out everyday activities. Thousands of unsuspecting Americans are also tagged in the database.

The lawsuit, filed by five Americans whose
personal data has been entered into anti-terror databases for
engaging in lawful behavior, aims to impose a “permanent
injunction” on a government program that “targets First
Amendment-protected activity, encourages racial and religious
profiling, and violates federal law.”

Since 2013, over 35,000 US citizens have had their personal
information stored away on terrorism databases - like the FBI's
eGuardian – where they remain on file for up to 30 years. The
disturbing trend of innocent Americans being ensnared in the
intelligence network has its origins in the post-9/11 era when
liberty-crippling legislation, like the US PATRIOT Act, turned
every citizen into a potential suspect.

The Government Accounting Office, in its 2013 annual report,
found that all 78 DHS fusion centers can contribute or share
information on the platform; 21 of the fusion centers share the
data directly with the FBI.

James Prigoff, a photographer from Sacramento, California,
perhaps understands the hidden pitfalls of America’s brave new
security apparatus better than anyone.

Prigoff, one of five plaintiffs filing a lawsuit in California
against Attorney General Eric Holder and a member of the Justice
Department, had a member of the joint-terrorism task force show
up at his door after he had traveled to Boston to snap photos of
the Rainbow Swash, a 140-foot gas storage tank covered in rainbow
stripes. While photographing the public work of art, Prigoff was
confronted by security guards, who proceeded to fill out a
“suspicious activity report” on the California
photographer.

"This is supposed to be a free country, where the government
isn’t supposed to be tracking you if you’re not doing anything
wrong,” Prigoff said in a statement. “I lived through
the McCarthy era, and I know how false accusations, surveillance,
and keeping files on innocent people can destroy careers and
lives.

“I am deeply troubled that the SAR program may be recreating
that same climate of false accusation and fear today."

You could land in an FBI database for photographing which: a)
bridge b) public art c) post office d) ALL OF THE ABOVE
pic.twitter.com/nr8BQ8th72

Other plaintiffs in the lawsuit include an accountant of Egyptian
descent who said a “suspicious activity report” was filed about
him after he tried to make a bulk computer purchase for work from
Best Buy. Another, a man of Pakistani descent, said he was tagged
while waiting for his mother — who was wearing a hijab, a formal
head covering — outside the bathroom of a train station.

According to its website, the initiative attempts to pinpoint
behavior that is: "reasonably indicative of preoperational
planning related to terrorism or other criminal activity."
Civil liberty groups, however, say the initiative opens the door
to possible abuses of power.

“We’ve long been concerned that the federal standards that
we’re challenging in this lawsuit are too loose because they
allow the reporting of information even when there’s no
reasonable suspicion of criminal activity,” Linda Lye, staff
attorney for the ACLU, one of several watchdog groups that
initiated the suit.

Justice Department spokeswoman Nicole Navas said the department
was reviewing the lawsuit “and it would be inappropriate to
comment further at this time.”

Meanwhile, John Cohen, a former homeland security official who
helped devise the joint-terrorism prevention program, called the
ACLU’s lawsuit ironic because the civil rights group was actually
involved in its development.

“They are attacking a program that they helped to design, and
they are criticizing language that they actually drafted and
provided to the government,” Cohen, now a professor at
Rutgers University’s school of criminal justice, told the Daily
News.

The nation’s controversial “suspicious activity” program
has come under scrutiny before.

A 2012 Senate report said that fusion centers had used dubious
methods to collect data on Americans, while producing little
significant intelligence on criminal activity and terrorism.

A March 2013 Government Accountability Office study revealed that
the Justice Department office in charge of supervising the
suspicious-activity program does not account for "their role
in deterring terrorist activities or the number of arrests or
convictions achieved."